"We Read to Discover What Meaning the Writer Has Made." A Chat With Joe Mackall, Editor of River Teeth

Riverteeth, a Journal of Non-fiction Narrative, is one of the first journals to focus on non-fiction writing. On the journal’s About Us page, David James Duncan describes riverteeth as the knots in logs in a river, hard knots that aren’t carried away by the current to decompose. These riverteeth are the enduring bits of memory that writers use to compose narratives. Joe Mackall, one of the co-editors of Riverteeth, took the time to answer The Review Review’s questions.

Interview by Amanda Webster

What are the advantages of having a journal devoted to nonfiction?

I’ll answer this one a couple of ways. When we started River Teeth in 1999 there was only one other journal devoted exclusively to nonfiction. (Creative Nonfiction launched in 1994, I believe, and Fourth Genre started the same year RT did.) At the time we didn’t think it made much sense to start one more journal that contained fiction, poetry and nonfiction. We happened to be at the right place at the right time. Soon there were the three big nonfiction journals at a time when the genre was exploding. River Teeth received a great deal of attention from writers and editors. Also my co-editor, Dan Lehman, and I had both worked as reporters but all our degrees were in English. We loved literature even if we read it in the pages of newspapers or magazines.

During the many writing classes I’ve taken, at least two teachers, both primarily fiction writers, have claimed that fiction writing needs to be of a higher standard to be published. Is this true? As an editor, have you ever selected a piece because you’ve considered the content worthy of publication even if other submissions you’ve read have been better written?

I’m not sure about this question, Amanda. I’ve always heard it’s tougher to publish fiction than nonfiction, and I’m sure some of that is aided by subject matter. I can honestly say that for us subject matter is rarely of any importance. For us it’s always about what the writer does with her subject matter, the meaning she makes. As our dear friend Judith Kitchen said: “Nonfiction writers don’t make up, we make of.” We read to discover what meaning the writer has made of her material. Having said this, almost every single person who submits to River Teeth can write well, and we all know that good writing by itself is not enough either. We see plenty of well-written submissions where the writer has not made me want to read to the end of the piece.

Joe, in a panel we were on together at AWP, Seattle, you spoke of not trusting direct dialogue in memoirs about events that took place long ago. What is your response to seeing dialogue-heavy writing in submissions? Do you consider dialogue more suspect than other aspects of memory—setting descriptions, for example?

I don’t have a serious problem with dialogue in memoir. I believe we’re all pretty knowledgeable and forgiving when it comes to the vagaries of memory. We know that often even the gist of what was said twenty years ago—hell, twenty minutes—can be misremembered. For me it’s always about intent. Do I feel the writer is trying to honestly capture what she said or heard somebody say years ago? If the writer has earned her credibility, I’ll believe her dialogue. If she hasn’t earned it, I won’t believe a thing she writes.

Can you describe your selection process? Can you come up with three adjectives to describe writing that might catch your eye? Do you have any biases when it comes to style, such as present tense narratives?

We have no biases when it comes to style or subject matter. What we always want to read is writing that matters. We want writing that had to be written. Too often we receive pieces the writer needed to publish, but didn’t necessarily need to write. We want pieces that scream of their urgency. I still read the way I read fifty years ago. I read to learn something new about what it’s like to live on the face of the earth. I read to be reminded of truths I need to hear over and over again. Our selection process is pretty simple that way. When it comes to what actually winds up in the journal, Dan Lehman and I make all final decisions. It’s not a board or a committee that picks a piece. We have readers who make suggestions, but Dan and I decide what we publish. We’ve done this with every issue since 1999. In many ways we’re more like a magazine than a journal.

How does having work published in journals in general and River Teeth specifically benefit an emerging writer?

I think writers derive great benefits from being published in literary journals generally and in River Teeth specifically. Our writers have told us they’ve found agents, editors and publishers because of appearing in River Teeth. Agents have contacted us wanting to get in touch with our writers. Many younger writers are helped with their confidence—something writers of all ages need—along with helping with their tenure and their teaching. It’s always nice knowing that some editor somewhere has said yes to one’s work. It helps answer the question: “Have you’ve been published?” Publishing in literary journals helps writers get acquainted with revision, meeting deadlines, working with editors and copyeditors. It’s a great first step.

Essays or short memoirs: do you have a preference as a reader, or a writer?

We love to read and publish essays, memoir, hybrid stuff and literary journalism. We have no real preference. However, we receive far more pieces of memoir than essays and far more essays than works of literary journalism.

What do you hope readers gain from River Teeth?

I believe River Teeth readers come in contact with the best creative nonfiction out there, free of any bias or politics or philosophy other than that good writing counts and facts matter.

Amanda Webster, formerly a medical doctor, lives and writes in Sydney with her family, an ageing Layanese cat, way too many books, and an excellent collection of literary journals. Her first memoir The Boy Who Loved Apples (Text Publishing) was released in Australia, Germany, and the Netherlands. Her second, A Tear in the Soul (New South Publishing), a story of personal reconciliation with Aboriginal people Webster knew as a child, was recently released. Her essays have been published in several literary journals including Alimentum, Hunger Mountain, and Black Warrior Review, and in Vogue Australia. She holds an MFA in Creative Writing from City University of Hong Kong.